News

News

Lankan federal model should be evolved within
By Ameen Izzadeen
In a multi-cultural, multi-lingual global order, federalism as a political idea is increasingly gaining currency as it offers a peaceful means to reconcile unity with diversity within a constitutional framework.

With more than half the world's population living in countries that have adopted a federal constitution or a similar power-sharing mechanism, federalism is shattering the nation-state concept and bringing together people of diverse ethnic, linguistic and religious identities to bring forth a dynamic modern state to achieve national socio-economic goals.

But federalism is not a panacea for all socio-economic and political ills of a society. It is even feared as a stepping-stone to separation and a challenge to sovereignty.
Professor Ellis Katz, Emeritus Professor of Political Science and Fellow of the Center for the Study of Federalism at Temple University, USA, was in Sri Lanka recently, where he spoke and conferred with academics, government officials and policy makers on the subject of federalism.

Grudgingly admitting he was being identified as an advocate of federalism, Prof. Katz spoke of the benefits and boundaries of federalism, which he says takes many forms and could be asymmetric depending on the needs of a given situation. The following are excerpts from an interview with Prof. Katz, author of books such as American Models of Revolutionary Leadership, Ethnic Group Politics, Federalism and Rights, State Constitutions in the American Federal System:

Q: Though federalism is a politically sensitive word in Sri Lanka, a federal option is being offered as a solution to the ethnic problem here. However, opponents of this approach believe that federalism will eventually lead to separation. Your comments, please.
A: Federalism gives expression to people's linguistic, religious and cultural connections and traditions while maintaining their links with the larger unit - the national government. Federalism accommodates diverse views of different people. There should be recognition in a federal setup that the individual has loyalty to the small unit as well as the large unit. It is an idea and can take different forms. Different countries have adopted different forms of federalism based on their needs.

Federalism is also a constitutional framework and therefore, it can have safeguards against separation. If disputes arise, there are plenty of ways to solve them. For instance, in the United States, the federal Supreme Court is entrusted with the task of settling disputes between states or between a state and the federal government.
Besides, constitutional mechanisms could be worked out to sort out problems. Many federal modules have a bicameral system in the centre. This allows for greater participation of the regions in national politics and policies and ensures the unity and territorial integrity of the federal state. Some federal countries have adopted different models to achieve such purposes. For instance, in Switzerland, there is a plural executive and in Canada, Quebec is guaranteed two seats in the federal Supreme Court.

Q : Opponents of federalism also say sovereignty is inalienable and therefore they see an erosion of sovereignty from the centre to the periphery in a federal setup. In the context of today's political developments and thoughts, how do you see the concept of sovereignty?
A: In the United States, where the federal system evolved with independent states conceding power to a central authority, we say the people are sovereign and the people delegate sovereignty to the state and the national government. This does not mean that we alienate sovereignty. Rather, it is shared and exercised by the entire people.

But today, the whole concept of sovereignty is changing. Sovereignty, in a traditional sense, meant the real control over the population and the resources of the country. This is no longer true. The concept of sovereignty has moved away from the rigid notion that grew in the 18th and 19th centuries. While the World Trade Organization, the European Union and similar international systems demand nation-states'compliance with the international order, the globalization process penetrates every sphere of life. Sovereignty has to be understood in this new light.

Similarly, the concept of 'one nation and one state' model is changing to give recognition to the multi-ethnic nature of the state, which is a combination of national and sub-national units. Sovereignty is reflected in a democracy. A federal setup brings out a compound democracy - at individual level and at state level. Federalism is essentially a form of democracy. The fact that more than half the people of the world live in a federal state or a state that recognizes federal principles vouches for the acceptance of federalism as a democratic model.

Q: Yes, there are different forms of federalism. But don't you agree that what is suited to Sri Lanka must be one that is evolved after taking into consideration Sri Lankan realities?
A: There are 25 different models of federalism with each one working to meet different aspirations. There is no template for federalism. A federal solution for Sri Lanka has to be evolved within Sri Lanka. Take, for instance, Italy. It has evolved regionalism - a kind of federalism -with a great deal of authority being vested in the periphery. In the Spanish federal model, devolution of power is asymmetrical. Federal arrangements could be worked out in such a way as to suit each situation or the needs of a particular region.

Federalism is, as everyone knows, not only a process where the centre devolves powers to the regions, but also a means by which different independent states come together in a union for the common good of all.

However, whatever the form of federalism, certain powers with regard to monetary policies, foreign relations and defence have to be vested in the centre. This does not mean that the units have no say in these matters. For instance, the cantons in the Swiss federal system play an active role in foreign-policy making. In the United States, some northern states have signed special treaties with Canada to obtain and provide emergency assistance. Of course, these arrangements have the federal government's blessings.

As regards monetary policy, the federated units or regions could act as members of a monetary union. There could be some leeway in defence matters as well. In the US federal system, for instance, states could form its own militia in addition to their own police forces to tackle crime and civil disturbances.

Q: What about control over natural resources?
A: Natural resources which are vital to the national economy should be the concern of the federal government. But the regions should have the economic autonomy to exploit certain natural resources, if necessary, by way of arrangement with the central government.

Q: Your comments on the present constitutional crisis in Sri Lanka?
A: The cohabitation experience is peculiar to a few constitutions such as the French and the Sri Lankan ones. In France, it is a constitutional mechanism introduced by Charles de Gaulle in the Fifth Republic after a long period of political instability. It is working well there because the system has achieved its maturity.

Back to News